IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Fast Reroute for Node Protection in LDP-based LSPs

Hannes Gredler <hannes@gredler.at> Tue, 06 December 2016 11:17 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes@gredler.at>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F4EF129522; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 03:17:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.796
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.796 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oC8xnuwyMbBa; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 03:17:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gilfert.gredler.at (gilfert.gredler.at [87.106.222.165]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F43D12950F; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 03:17:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hannes-mba.local (91-114-153-19.adsl.highway.telekom.at [::ffff:91.114.153.19]) (AUTH: PLAIN hannes, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,128bits,AES128-SHA) by gilfert.gredler.at with ESMTPSA; Tue, 06 Dec 2016 12:17:34 +0100 id 00000000035D8005.0000000058469E4E.0000539C
To: Santosh Esale <sesale@juniper.net>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
References: <D46B0792.DB8E0%sesale@juniper.net>
From: Hannes Gredler <hannes@gredler.at>
Message-ID: <03cfb8de-649d-9f26-01f1-a5f1a8181e9b@gredler.at>
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 12:17:34 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D46B0792.DB8E0%sesale@juniper.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/NR5AaLo6jS7erzwyT5iut1zZt2M>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Fast Reroute for Node Protection in LDP-based LSPs
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 11:17:40 -0000

hi santosh,

just curious why the proposed solution is constrained to only use LDP ?

IMO what you have suggested here would just fit nicely for protecting
segment-routing node labels as well. segment routing node-labels are
"calculated" in a similar fashion than LDP labels as such my guess would
be that this solution applies to SR node labels as well.

suggest to generalize it to:
"Fast Reroute for Node Protection in hop-by-hop based LSPs"

thanks,

/hannes


On 12/5/16 20:59, Santosh Esale wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>                            We have presented the draft
> - draft-esale-mpls-ldp-node-frr – in
> MPLS working group in three IETF meetings including the latest one at Seul. 
> However, as the draft is of interest to routing working too, we are
> initiating this 
> thread to solicit feedbacks from the routing working group. Please let
> us know
> your comments.
> 
> Presentations - 
> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-mpls-3.pdf
> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/94/slides/slides-94-mpls-3.pptx
> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-mpls-08-ti-frr-ietf-97-00.pptx
> 
> Thanks,
> Santosh (on behalf of authors)
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email